On Wednesday 12 August 2009 20:34:55 lostson wrote:
long snip
We need to stand up and ask - How may
I help ? What do you need to get this done. Ask yourself what talents do
you have that you can offer the project. There are many ways to do this
and you can find them here
Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Joseph L. Casale wrote:
I didn't 'get' the security implications of the rebuild stuff til it was
explained to me the other day.
Share the knowledge:) Aside from the delay involved while the devs build rpm's
from the srpm's, is there more
Ian Murray wrote:
This applies to 5.X as it stands, as 4.X. Once RH 5.4 hits the streets,
then CentOS 5 users will be in the same boat. I would hope nobody feels
they are getting beaten up about this. The intention is not to beat
anybody up. Anyway, I am going to try *really* hard not to post
On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 20:42 -0500, Ron Blizzard wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Ian Murraymurra...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I am troubled by the window of opportunity that a hacker has between RH
releasing a point release and CentOS releasing the equivalent. Every RH
published errata for
Hi,
Late to the party, oops! Everything in this email is my personal
opinion, and I speak for myself not the project here. Just as Russ and
Johnny dont speak for the project either in their emails, they speak for
themselves.
On 08/06/2009 02:52 PM, Marcus Moeller wrote:
I recently started
James B. Byrne wrote:
Nonetheless, it is very evident from the heated exchanges on this
mailing list that there exists a substantial divergence on which
path to take from here. It seems to me insupportable that the past
practices of a small coterie of initiates deciding on everything
vent
/vent
smirk
Long live the kings
/smirk
-Ray
I must admit, may be I missed something here, but there seems to be quite a bit
of outpouring of appreciation on this thread. I am sure that all that give up
their time and effort to make CentOS happen really deserve all the thanks and
Ian Murray wrote:
Part of my professional work is risk assessing system upgrades. I have
been doing so long now that everything I professionally do is considered
from a risk perspective. Maybe those of us that have to assess risk on a
daily basis understand what I am on about and the
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Les Mikeselllesmikes...@gmail.com wrote:
Ian Murray wrote:
Part of my professional work is risk assessing system upgrades. I have
been doing so long now that everything I professionally do is considered
from a risk perspective. Maybe those of us that have to
at least.
From: Ron Blizzard rb4cen...@gmail.com
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
Sent: Tuesday, 11 August, 2009 22:06:05
Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Les Mikeselllesmikes...@gmail.com wrote:
Ian Murray
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
Why don't you go with the SL or even pay RH, if you are that concerned about
hacking attempts? It seems clear that CentOS is not a good distro for you if
you are not satisfied with its update schedule. I believe it is better to
make
a different choice of distro,
I believe it is better to make
a different choice of distro, than to ask for substantial changes in the
current one, especially if other people should do that extra work for you.
Believe what you like, but I believe it's better to raise my concern for
discussion in the first instance. For the
On Tuesday 11 August 2009 23:25:23 Ian Murray wrote:
I am troubled by the window of opportunity that a hacker has between RH
releasing a point release and CentOS releasing the equivalent. Every RH
published errata for that stream is a known weakness to your system and
there is not a sausage
Ian Murray wrote:
I believe it is better to make
a different choice of distro, than to ask for substantial changes in the
current one, especially if other people should do that extra work for you.
Believe what you like, but I believe it's better to raise my concern for
discussion in the
You are probably right there. I lost interest in Linux for ages because of what
RH did. It was CentOS that re-ignited my interest. I felt like I could 'get
back' what I had lost when Redhat killed RHL. I didn't 'get' the security
implications of the rebuild stuff til it was explained to me the
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Ian Murraymurra...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I am troubled by the window of opportunity that a hacker has between RH
releasing a point release and CentOS releasing the equivalent. Every RH
published errata for that stream is a known weakness to your system and
there
I didn't 'get' the security implications of the rebuild stuff til it was
explained to me the other day.
Share the knowledge:) Aside from the delay involved while the devs build rpm's
from the srpm's, is there more to it?
Thanks,
jlc
___
CentOS
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Joseph L. Casale wrote:
I didn't 'get' the security implications of the rebuild
stuff til it was explained to me the other day.
Share the knowledge:) Aside from the delay involved while
the devs build rpm's from the srpm's, is there more to it?
This thread will never
Joseph L. Casale wrote:
I didn't 'get' the security implications of the rebuild stuff til it was
explained to me the other day.
Share the knowledge:) Aside from the delay involved while the devs build rpm's
from the srpm's, is there more to it?
It's been covered already. When RH does a
Hi all,
Well, I know I have benefited from the discussion because I understand the
challenges that face the CentOS team with regards to security updates whilst
they are rebuilding a point release. As has been pointed out to me, we're
between a rock and a hard-place and it isn't just a simple
R P Herrold wrote:
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, Bob Taylor wrote:
Personally, it disgusts me.
Have I said I don't appreciate it?
Yes, actually -- I call b*llsh*t -- you who have done nothing
are here, and eat without charge at our table, and 'it
disgusts' you
So we begin to actively drive
Ralph Angenendt napsal(a):
So we begin to actively drive away people now who say they appreciate
the distribution or others who are actively trying to help?
Sorry, please make it clear that this is *YOUR POINT* of view and not of
all the people who are making CentOS happen at the moment.
Marcus Moeller wrote on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:08:45 +0200:
Maybe these should just not comment on
a thread like this.
Yeah. And that's why I wrote very early on that this list isn't the right
place ;-) Just one comment that someone gets in the wrong throat and the
whole thread and purpose of
On Sun, 9 Aug 2009 03:23:57 +0100 Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com
wrote:
Unfortunately, governments are typically not made of experts, but of
opportunists. Name one president of insert your favorite political
entity here that has been elected because he has a PhD in political
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 3:12 PM, James B. Byrnebyrn...@harte-lyne.ca wrote:
Nonetheless, it is very evident from the heated exchanges on this
mailing list that there exists a substantial divergence on which
path to take from here. It seems to me insupportable that the past
practices of a
On Monday 10 August 2009 21:12:11 James B. Byrne wrote:
On Sun, 9 Aug 2009 03:23:57 +0100 Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com
wrote:
Unfortunately, governments are typically not made of experts, but of
opportunists. Name one president of insert your favorite political
entity here that has
On Monday 10 August 2009 22:12:41 Ron Blizzard wrote:
Again, what does
community input have to do with the mechanical process of turning
upstream code into a 100% binary compatible distribution?
Nothing, of course. :-) There seem to be only two things such input would
provide:
(1) the
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
The whole thread put shortly (the way I see it) goes like this:
* A community member shouts Because of recent dev-internal events, I don't
trust the developers any more, I want the project changed so that I can
regain
my trust!
That's not at all what I saw. I
I've rambled on too long. But seriously, what is you want? CentOS is a
great Linux distribution, so what's the problem?
The 'progress' I am talking about it making those 4 million installs into 5
million installs, if that is important. (I wish 4 mill installs hadn't been
raised, because on
Ian Murray wrote:
I've rambled on too long. But seriously, what is you want? CentOS is a
great Linux distribution, so what's the problem?
The 'progress' I am talking about it making those 4 million installs
into 5 million installs, if that is important. (I wish 4 mill installs
hadn't
Johnny Hughes wrote:
Ian Murray wrote:
snip
WRT to the one valid issue that you raise ... let me explain the
TECHNICAL reason why you can not release these things hodge podge.
First ... Red Hat releases point releases at regular intervals (3-4
times per year).
Second ... we do not
People who do not understand the technical issues involved do not see
why we can't just snap our fingers and put out the packages ... well, we
can't.
What you explain makes perfect sense and so thanks for taking the time to
explain. I was only basing my understanding on what Karanbir wrote on
...@centos.org
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
Sent: Sunday, 9 August, 2009 13:54:50
Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Johnny Hughes wrote:
Ian Murray wrote:
snip
WRT to the one valid issue that you raise ... let me explain the
TECHNICAL reason why you can not release
Ian Murray wrote:
People who do not understand the technical issues involved do not see
why we can't just snap our fingers and put out the packages ... well, we
can't.
What you explain makes perfect sense and so thanks for taking the time
to explain. I was only basing my understanding on what
Johnny Hughes wrote:
That is the problem ... therefore, we HAVE to finish the point release
and get it out before we can build new updates released after the point
release. This is not new, it has been an issue since the first rebuild
more than 5 years ago.
People who do not understand
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Les Mikeselllesmikes...@gmail.com wrote:
Johnny Hughes wrote:
That is the problem ... therefore, we HAVE to finish the point release
and get it out before we can build new updates released after the point
release. This is not new, it has been an issue since
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 6:23 AM, Ian Murraymurra...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
There is nothing wrong with the distribution itself, long may it live. My
concern is that it is too reliant on individuals. A concern the devs raised
themselves through the open letter. I am raising the same concern about
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 8:21 AM, Ian Murraymurra...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I did understand it the first time, but thanks again for the further
clarification. This kinda illustrates my point. Couldn't you have a
different repo with these updates maintained by other community members,
under the
2009/8/9 Ron Blizzard rb4cen...@gmail.com
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 8:21 AM, Ian Murraymurra...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I did understand it the first time, but thanks again for the further
clarification. This kinda illustrates my point. Couldn't you have a
different repo with these updates
On Sun, 2009-08-09 at 14:04 -0500, Ron Blizzard wrote:
snip
As for getting more people to use CentOS, I don't think squabbling on
a public mail list is exactly the best way to do that.
OTOH, one man's squabbling is another's open discourse, depending on
attitudes, presentation, etc. That's
:44:00
Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sun, 2009-08-09 at 14:04 -0500, Ron Blizzard wrote:
snip
As for getting more people to use CentOS, I don't think squabbling on
a public mail list is exactly the best way to do that.
OTOH, one man's squabbling is another's open
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Ian Murraymurra...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Well, I know I have benefited from the discussion because I understand the
challenges that face the CentOS team with regards to security updates whilst
they are rebuilding a point release. As has been pointed out to me, we're
To all, especially the developers, people who work on the support
documents in their various forms, and everyone who contributes their
knowledge to this project:
I am another one of those people who reads the lists frequently, but
usually don't have much to contribute since there are many
Bob Taylor wrote:
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 11:54 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Bob Taylor wrote:
[snip]
Exactly the *wrong* response. I wonder if responses similar to this
loses potential users or loses existing customers. Personally, it
disgusts me.
It is not *wrong* ... any more than your
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 08:28 +0200, Andrew Colin Kissa wrote:
On 07 Aug 2009, at 8:14 AM, Marcus Moeller wrote:
(like the Contrib repo) are getting a bit clearer so I
guess we are on the right track.
Contib repo !!! What Contrib repo ? The last time i tried to
contribute i was told
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 11:05 -0400, JohnS wrote:
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 08:28 +0200, Andrew Colin Kissa wrote:
On 07 Aug 2009, at 8:14 AM, Marcus Moeller wrote:
(like the Contrib repo) are getting a bit clearer so I
guess we are on the right track.
Contib repo !!! What Contrib
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 05:48 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Bob Taylor wrote:
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 11:54 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Bob Taylor wrote:
[snip]
Exactly the *wrong* response. I wonder if responses similar to this
loses potential users or loses existing customers.
Bob Taylor wrote:
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 05:48 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Second, I am supposed to also kiss your ass?
Is it necessary to insult me? I have said *nothing* to you to warrant
this.
Jeez, people, take it offline.
-Alan
Alan Sparks wrote:
Bob Taylor wrote:
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 05:48 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Second, I am supposed to also kiss your ass?
Is it necessary to insult me? I have said *nothing* to you to warrant
this.
Jeez, people, take it offline.
-Alan
Sorry Alan, but with
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, Bob Taylor wrote:
Personally, it disgusts me.
Have I said I don't appreciate it?
Yes, actually -- I call b*llsh*t -- you who have done nothing
are here, and eat without charge at our table, and 'it
disgusts' you
Begone, troll
-- Russ herrold
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, R P Herrold wrote:
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, Bob Taylor wrote:
Personally, it disgusts me.
Have I said I don't appreciate it?
Yes, actually -- I call b*llsh*t -- you who have done nothing
are here, and eat without charge at our table, and 'it
disgusts' you
Begone, troll
Dag
concern is good and you are right about how CentOS people should have a
solid testimony for the projects big picture
the thing is that since day one, as near as i have experienced and can tell,
most of them have many years of rock solid CentOS work as a testimony.
rock solid!
we haven't
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robertlist...@abbacomm.net wrote:
snip
please stop poking the bears... ;-
it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the
people running it should just move on and go away as asked
+1 How easy it is to criticize people who have
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 19:31 -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
snip
Yep, I think it is because people often want to travel straight from A
to Z without having to go through B, C, D, etc. Another subset of
people, the talkers want to dictate to the doers how things should
be done, often without
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 18:28 +0100, Ned Slider wrote:
snip
Sorry Alan, but with the greatest respect I believe it important that
these types of discussions are allowed to happen openly within the
community. This thread was started on a community mailing list by a
member of that community
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 15:04 -0500, Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robertlist...@abbacomm.net wrote:
snip
please stop poking the bears... ;-
it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the
people running it should just move on and go away
This presents a ripe opportunity for a perception of
unwarranted criticism, whining by someone who paid
nothing, lack of appreciation for all the *free* hard work
we do, etc.
snip sig stuff
--
Bill
Bill,
Good points...
yet you forgot about presentation if a person makes
On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robertlist...@abbacomm.net wrote:
snip
please stop poking the bears... ;-
it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the
people running it should just move on and go away as asked
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 16:14 -0700, Robert wrote:
This presents a ripe opportunity for a perception of
unwarranted criticism, whining by someone who paid
nothing, lack of appreciation for all the *free* hard work
we do, etc.
snip sig stuff
--
Bill
Bill,
Good
Who is the project serving? The core themselves or a community of
users as well? If that is effectively and accurately answered, then the
dynamics of the relationship(s) between users of the project and the
core can be more clearly stated and understood.
In the end, most F/LOSS projects seem
William L. Maltby wrote:
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 19:31 -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
snip
Yep, I think it is because people often want to travel straight from A
to Z without having to go through B, C, D, etc. Another subset of
people, the talkers want to dictate to the doers how things
On 8/8/09, Marko A. Jennings marko...@bluegargoyle.com wrote:
On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robertlist...@abbacomm.net wrote:
snip
please stop poking the bears... ;-
it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the
Marko A. Jennings wrote:
On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robertlist...@abbacomm.net wrote:
snip
please stop poking the bears... ;-
it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the
people running it should just move
On Sat, August 8, 2009 8:44 pm, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Marko A. Jennings wrote:
On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robertlist...@abbacomm.net wrote:
snip
please stop poking the bears... ;-
it isn't productive and many of you that are critical
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 19:37 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
William L. Maltby wrote:
snip
I only have one question that I want to add to this gawd-awful thread
now.
Who is the project serving? The core themselves or a community of
users as well? If that is effectively and accurately
Marko A. Jennings wrote:
On Sat, August 8, 2009 8:44 pm, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Marko A. Jennings wrote:
On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robertlist...@abbacomm.net wrote:
snip
please stop poking the bears... ;-
it isn't productive and
list centos@centos.org
Sent: Sunday, 9 August, 2009 1:44:47
Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Marko A. Jennings wrote:
On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robertlist...@abbacomm.net wrote:
snip
please stop poking the bears
Ian Murray wrote:
I can't say I have been following this thread in its entirety, but the
beauty (?) of free speech is that even the ill-informed get to have a
say. :o)
Anyway, I think there is a general problem with the name Community
ENterprise OS. Well, Community can't refer to us users
On Sunday 09 August 2009 00:50:16 Marko A. Jennings wrote:
Your statement implies that people that have not contributed to a certain
goal cannot possibly have a good suggestion.
Of course, this is a very common and useful line of reasoning in human
society. Put shortly, it increases
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 20:01 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
If you mean that I can be an arrogant SOB sometimes, then YES, we (and
my wife) can agree.
I also can certainly try to be nicer, yes.
I am very tired of this whole thread - I think you have covered it well.
But I will say
4 million unique machines do not agree with you, regardless of what you
want to believe.
I don't think the machines have an opinion, either way. :o) Seriously, I
suppose you are using the '4 million machines we must be doing something right'
argument which is fair comment, if perhaps a
Johnny Hughes wrote:
snip
If you mean that I can be an arrogant SOB sometimes, then YES, we (and
my wife) can agree.
Before making an admission like that, you should re-read
http://wwwf.centos.org/127_story.html?storyid=127
I thought then and think now that you were 'way too humble
in
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:12 PM, Ian Murraymurra...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I can't say I have been following this thread in its entirety, but the
beauty (?) of free speech is that even the ill-informed get to have a say.
:o)
Anyway, I think there is a general problem with the name Community
Dear Russ,
Don't misunderstand. I think you have done and are doing a great job
but some things are out of any single person's control. All I'm
suggesting is that it would be nice if there were an easy answer to the
question of what if those things happen to a few of you. I think it
is a
On 07 Aug 2009, at 8:14 AM, Marcus Moeller wrote:
(like the Contrib repo) are getting a bit clearer so I
guess we are on the right track.
Contib repo !!! What Contrib repo ? The last time i tried to
contribute i was told to head on to Fedora or rpmforge.
Dear Andrew.
(like the Contrib repo) are getting a bit clearer so I
guess we are on the right track.
Contib repo !!! What Contrib repo ? The last time i tried to
contribute i was told to head on to Fedora or rpmforge.
The Contrib repository has been re-invented in CentOS 5.3 but it's
still
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Marcus Moeller wrote on Thu, 6 Aug 2009 15:52:01 +0200:
Dear Community,
I think the community would benefit from opening a new mailing list for
these issues. There's already a promo list, but a discussion like this
doesn't really fit on it. I also think it doesn't
Marcus Moeller wrote:
Dear Russ,
Don't misunderstand. I think you have done and are doing a great job
but some things are out of any single person's control. All I'm
suggesting is that it would be nice if there were an easy answer to the
question of what if those things happen to a few of
Marcus Moeller wrote:
Dear Andrew.
(like the Contrib repo) are getting a bit clearer so I
guess we are on the right track.
Contib repo !!! What Contrib repo ? The last time i tried to
contribute i was told to head on to Fedora or rpmforge.
The Contrib repository has been re-invented in
Ned Slider wrote:
Marcus Moeller wrote:
Dear Russ,
Don't misunderstand. I think you have done and are doing a great job
but some things are out of any single person's control. All I'm
suggesting is that it would be nice if there were an easy answer to the
question of what if those things
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Ned Slider wrote:
From my own experiences when trying to contribute, I have repeatedly
been told not to bother, not to do it and to go away.
Being told 'no' differs from being told 'to go away' --
#centos IRC is about the only place we do that, and that is
under a
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 10:40 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Ned Slider wrote:
Marcus Moeller wrote:
Dear Russ,
[huge snip]
Look ... if you understand how build work, and I know you do, then you
understand that one can not release updates that are built on 4.8
without releasing 4.8.
If
Dear Russ,
[huge snip]
Look ... if you understand how build work, and I know you do, then you
understand that one can not release updates that are built on 4.8
without releasing 4.8.
If you need the updates faster, feel free to pay Redhat for them.
There - I feel so much better
Bob Taylor wrote:
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 10:40 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Ned Slider wrote:
Marcus Moeller wrote:
Dear Russ,
[huge snip]
Look ... if you understand how build work, and I know you do, then you
understand that one can not release updates that are built on 4.8
without
On Fri, August 7, 2009 12:54 pm, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Bob Taylor wrote:
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 10:40 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Ned Slider wrote:
Marcus Moeller wrote:
Dear Russ,
[huge snip]
Look ... if you understand how build work, and I know you do, then you
understand that one can
Johnny Hughes wrote:
There - I feel so much better getting that lot off my chest :)
There are always other distros if you don't like this one ...
Exactly the *wrong* response. I wonder if responses similar to this
loses potential users or loses existing customers. Personally, it
disgusts me.
Les Mikesell wrote:
*sigh*... Don't take this as a complaint about the quality of the
project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm
fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come
across as having a stranglehold of control. If we wanted a one man
Dear Johnny,
Well, if something is going to be released as part of CentOS (contrib
repo or not), then it is going to be correct and it is going to be
vetted by someone that I PERSONALLY trust ... or it is going to be
personally tested by me prior to release. Otherwise, it is not going to
be
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Les Mikesell wrote:
project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm
fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come
across as having a stranglehold of control.
I missed the memo -- what do we have a stranglehold on?
We'd feel
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Marcus Moeller wrote:
Then you should not perhaps not call it 'Contrib' repository
if no one that you do not personally know can add content to
it.
You don't like reputational vetting and a meritocracy, or how
it is run by the people in charge who have as one goal: not
nate wrote:
*sigh*... Don't take this as a complaint about the quality of the
project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm
fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come
across as having a stranglehold of control. If we wanted a one man show
we'd
2009/8/7 R P Herrold herr...@centos.org:
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Marcus Moeller wrote:
Then you should not perhaps not call it 'Contrib' repository
if no one that you do not personally know can add content to
it.
You don't like reputational vetting and a meritocracy, or how
it is run by the
R P Herrold wrote:
project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm
fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come
across as having a stranglehold of control.
I missed the memo -- what do we have a stranglehold on?
Remember, I'm just commenting on
So is it contrib repo or my buddies repo ? All we are asking is put in
place the mechanisms
to vet the reputation. The project can not be a true community project
when there are no
mechanisms for contribution.
On 07 Aug 2009, at 9:00 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
That was in response to
Les Mikesell wrote:
R P Herrold wrote:
project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm
fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come
across as having a stranglehold of control.
I missed the memo -- what do we have a stranglehold on?
Remember, I'm
Johnny Hughes wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
R P Herrold wrote:
project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm
fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come
across as having a stranglehold of control.
I missed the memo -- what do we have a stranglehold
Johnny Hughes wrote:
Johnny Hughes wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
R P Herrold wrote:
project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm
fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come
across as having a stranglehold of control.
I missed the memo -- what do
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Les Mikesell wrote:
And meanwhile there are things that aren't on schedule.
Or maybe there isn't a schedule - or maybe no one is
supposed to expect one.
oh please -- You've been around software, computers, and FOSS
long enough to know the game --
Publish a schedule
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Les Mikeselllesmikes...@gmail.com wrote:
That was in response to Johnny's comment about having to personally know
someone before they would be allowed to touch anything in the
repository. What if something happens to Johnny? Is there a bigger
picture?
I'm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Ned Slidern...@unixmail.co.uk wrote:
R P Herrold wrote:
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, Marcus Moeller wrote:
snip everything
The bit that causes all the confusion here is the C in the name
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
